Two posters that I was able to link together after some reflection were Birth Control, and The Large Hadron Collider. In both of these topics groups were discussed that were opposed to advancements in the science being spoken of. This group is primarily in both cases a religious group opposed to the tampering in areas related to god's work, although I must also mention the not-necessarily-religious pro-life group and pro-not-destroying-the-world group. The opposition these groups presents appears to be a paradigmatic difference; these people don't want science in these areas, and live in a reality full of spirits and demons. Reality for these groups is their ideologies, which they must defend because the opportunity to live in Fairy Land is too good to pass up.
Another topic brought up in both presentations was black boxes. In reference to this post, I will discuss voluntary black boxes. The Catholic opposition discussed for the Hadron Collider referred to the fact that they are fully aware of what these discoveries may mean, but they don't want to know because it may deligitmate the idea of god for some people. For birth control, we have condemnation directed towards abortionative birth control. Here we have a pro-choice group that wants the concept of the beginning of life to remain a mystery, because if we do not have life, we can't destroy it. Revealing the innards of this black box could make the idea of birth control more morally reprehensible, or less, depending on what our definition of life is.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I find it very interesting that the key opposition to many scientific advancements is often times religion. This is to be expected as for a long time the two entities have been going head to head about who understands the world better. It is very hard for religion to maintain its legitimation when a lot of its arguments are based on faith and blind belief, especially with science able to legitimate itself to a very progressive, cynical world. However, I think that religion is the necessary cultural balance we need in our society. Religion provides a needed hesitation to make sure our science isn't running amuck, and in fact making further legitimation necessary.
ReplyDeleteMe, too. And it really feels right when Latour forces me to see that often religion IS science--when they support each other, but just as much when they don't.
ReplyDelete